Newgrounds.com — Everything, By Everyone.

At 2/9/03 05:48 PM, TheNewAuk_defiant wrote:

There's the definition. Anarchy is not a political system. It's the lack of one. Though no government is perfect, how is anarchy preferable? It IS chaos, assuming we're using the correct definition. Under the lack of a government (that is, under anarachy) anyone can do anything they want, unless someone else stops them, because there's no government in place to stop them. Chaos. Lawlessness. There's no police, no public services at all, not to mention no organized national military to protect the land from foreign invaders. I don't understand. How can any intelligent, ethical person prefer anarchy as a "form of government"?

have you analized your ideals logically?
I think , your mind have been lokeed since you was born so, you can't think other things besides they have been taught to you

Um, maybe you should look closer.
You didn't state any reasons, any convincing arguments.
All you did was spew a couple of poorly worded and grammaritized insults.

I think , your mind have been lokeed since you was born so, you can't think other things besides they have been taught to you

But when you teach people from young you don't allow them to grow up "freely" (ok, you can never grow up freely).

How wouuld you solve this problem? Offering them all the governement possibilities (i.e democracy, comunism, anatchism, etc) and then let them to chose (and they might not chose to be anarchists, so what do you do) or teaching them that the only possible governement is the anarchism?

He said about "invaders", he think that we are on the new film of hollywood "e.t" , hahahah, i have been explain (in other posts) wich means the anarchism for me. sorry i don't speak english. i was born in brazil.

well i dont anarchist sucks i have rreaseched and it seems that wothout a government it's better and yet if there wasnt a government we would be ruled by some leader and goverment is not a decision its forced becouse people are greedy that's how they were born they will laways want to rule so screw anarchism we have will always be safe with government and yet on the other hand anrchism is the best way to go becouse we all dont want to live by rules (laws) and we dont want to listen to some leader that has fucked up so much that heeven needs to go to war.So yea anrchanism and government both have bad and good points.and im not choosing YOU HAVE TO MAKE THE DECISION.

I doubt anarchy would work in today's world, considering the huge global markets and industrilization. If we all decided to go anarchist, it would just be falling into another Dark Age. Part of human nature and psychology is the need to have a leader--someone or something to manage over them. If anarchy is followed by its pure definition (the absence of a government) then progress would grind to a halt and we would live in chaos for the rest of our lives. I agree with whoever was talking about having a big game where people are dropped into an environment in total anarchy, and wait to see what happens. I've had the excact same idea since I started taking social sciences! I think that anarchy goes along with communism as a type of government that would be nice, but is just too hard on natural human instincts.

At 2/11/03 04:37 PM, EXECRADOR wrote: He said about "invaders", he think that we are on the new film of hollywood "e.t" , hahahah, i have been explain (in other posts) wich means the anarchism for me. sorry i don't speak english. i was born in brazil.

Althought we don't have any leaders, It's mean we can do everthing, when we accept don't have an authority, it's beacuse we are suficientlly response to take our decisions,
for example: ( I'm a member of a free radio , and we don't have a leader, Every decisions is taken in an assembleary form) this is the base of the Anarchism Organization.
About the human instict, I believe that we are much free than slaves and we don't accept imposition, it's more razonable or I really think in the human capacity of self-management

At 2/11/03 09:11 PM, Kemamine wrote: e where people are dropped into an environment in total anarchy, and wait to see what happens. I've had the excact same idea since I started taking social sciences! I think that anarchy goes along with communism as a type of government that would be nice, but is just too hard on natural human instincts.

Errrrr.....well, actually this was what i wanted to quote only a mistake..

At 2/11/03 04:21 PM, Dr_Natch_Kilder wrote:

I think , your mind have been lokeed since you was born so, you can't think other things besides they have been taught to you

Yes, Dr Nach , It's a importan subject , weel I Think, that the education it shouldn't touch any form of government , but , there are values that I think it could be introyected on the childrens, values as .. responsible, freedom and solidarity among equals, etc. and on this point the anarchism always has been fought to build a education to touch the peoples to the life and not to the work

about something i eard here about that if anarchy rules now there must be another dark age i think is...false.

when our teachers speak us about history they say that rome it and the greek empire that but they forgot say us how lived the germans or the little villages in all the world in all the ages,ancient and modern too. that lived and lives now. an example is the tribes in the worl, a lot of them have an anarchic sistem and we don´t apreciate it.
the famous yanomamis have no govern or a lot of indigene tribes have no too. only that the history is wroten by the winners and now the winners are the militariced states.

At 2/12/03 04:56 PM, utopio wrote: an example is the tribes in the worl, a lot of them have an anarchic sistem and we don´t apreciate it.

Ohhh, and you say that tribal organization is similar to anarchism.... tribal warfare is also included? I remind that anarchism is against any war so you when you compare it you are contradicting yourself.

I'm sorry but i don't think this example works at all. You'll have to try harder next time

People beleive anarchy is chaos, Anarchy only brings destruction were no one is safe. That's not anarchy. Your thinking of Nileism, the societal equivelent of a riot. And if your a punk ass bitch who doesn't know what true anarchy is, then either stay with the system or fuck it.

At 2/8/03 01:13 AM, DeAdKoRnFrEaK wrote: Wow. I meat people who bought anarchy patches. Wow thats so fucking stupid. And anarchy blows besides the retarted anarchy followers. IT just wouldnt work because people suck.

a) learn to write english.
b) if you would reason with those "retarded anarchy followers" ar not as retarded as you think. it's not because their opinions are not the same as yours that makes people retarded.
c) it can work if everybody acts as a responsible human being. Alas there are not many people acting like that. like you
d) real anarchy is not against a government "an sich" it's against a government who suppresses the people.

excuse me for my bad english but it's only my 3rd language

Mr natch, what do you think a tribal war is? a tribal war haven´t got helicopters or guns. some times is only a "party" were two tribes insult reciprocavily. and a tribe war is originaly a eye by eye teeth by teeth revenge.

with our culture we can speak and solve the problems without arrive to guns. only if a leader (as aznar or bush) want war people go to war. people don´t want go to war

At 2/8/03 06:48 AM, Boco_the_Choco wrote:

At 2/8/03 01:13 AM, DeAdKoRnFrEaK wrote: Wow. I meat people who bought anarchy patches. Wow thats so fucking stupid. And anarchy blows besides the retarted anarchy followers. IT just wouldnt work because people suck.

Explain yourselve!
Why is it fucking stupid to buy anarchy patches?
Why does anarchy blow the retarted anarchy followers?
Why do people suck?

Give an answer to that and people will give clear replies!
Have you seen the replies so far?
They all say: Explain yourselve!
How many do you need until you really do?

Hmm, I'll answer your questions

It'ss tupid to buy anarchist patches because you're just going to sew it onto your dumass denim jacket to make you look cool or make other people stare at you because you don't look "normal". It is fuicking retarded.

Anarchy blows because if you don't want government then fucking leave you piece of shit. Move to a county where there is no government and see if your ass get's shot in the first 10 minutes. WIth no government, we'll all be fucked. But if you're like me, you would like to live, and not get your ass shot off. But i guess people are fucking dumb, and those people I hate.

People suck for a lot of reasons.

Too many to name.

Anarchy has a purpose and I stand by that purpose. I do not think that the government does the right things with the power it is given. The people should deside. And though the people have alot of say... They did all of it.

Seriously, anarchists might as well change their opinions' names to "angst-archists," because none of them know what they're talking about, and are all those "omg teh world is teh suxx0r, its n0t my falt 4 being a f4gb0t, its teyr falt, omg!"

Anarchy wouldn't make the world go round very long...

It's true that government often do not listen to the people but if there is no order. What will stop criminals if no one has the right to do anything against them?

Anarchy is just a proposition, not a solution.
The only good part in anarchy would be that people get the commands.

Criminals like Saddam? I totally agree.

anarchy blows cock. it won't work EVER. there's to many fucked up people in the world... so why ever bother you fuckers?

At 2/10/03 07:00 PM, EXECRADOR wrote: The communis aspires to conquer power to create a proletarian dictatorshipe

Wait a minute: The marxism aspires to conquer the power only to destroy it, i think (and you can discuss it with me) that the best form of destroying something is from inside, and remember the proletarian dicatorship it's only a step between the represion of the actual gobernment and the freedom given by the communism.

At 2/20/03 01:03 PM, firehead wrote: Anarchy wouldn't make the world go round very long...

That's something i entirely agree with you

It's true that government often do not listen to the people but if there is no order. What will stop criminals if no one has the right to do anything against them?

Actually, i think they would have an assembly (sp?) to decide what they should do with him, as you have to respect the freedom of the other. Pretty useless when it's a big community.

Anarchy is just a proposition, not a solution.

It depends of the number of inhabitants. If there are a lot, i think it's only a proposition, as you said

The only good part in anarchy would be that people get the commands.

However, i don't agree with you here. When people get the commands, they are usually rather simple, the mass usually acts as a member, so at the end it would be the actions of a group of people that are afraid of everything (as masses usually are)

Let's just leave it at the fact that Anarchy isn't a very possible option for mass-antigovernment in this world any time soon.

n dicatorship it's only a step between the represion of the actual gobernment and the freedom given by the communism.

ok, I don't believe that the dictashirp can be "trasitory". The dictadorship aspires to be the maxim time possble in the power. In this time ,Marxy says that it would be a transitory peiriode. the communist party would take over the control of everythings and we would be under emblem of the communist party. The anarchism thinks that none to able to give freedom to the people, The fredoom should emanate completally from the people. (no imposition)

Just check up on your spelling and you have some potential to make valid points.

At 2/21/03 03:56 PM, Dr_Natch_Kilder wrote:

At 2/20/03 01:03 PM, firehead wrote: It's true that government often do not listen to the people but if there is no order. What will stop criminals if no one has the right to do anything against them?

Actually, i think they would have an assembly (sp?) to decide what they should do with him, as you have to respect the freedom of the other. Pretty useless when it's a big community.

An assembly? Ok, who would be in charge of this "assembly"? how would it be dicided without using some sort of electoral process? How could he be a criminal when he lives in a society without laws, therefore he cannot break any. How would a suitable punishment be given without some sort of vote? How could any of it be done without some sort of government? It can't.

At 2/22/03 02:17 AM, Mor-GanX wrote:

An assembly? Ok, who would be in charge of this

ohh "GOD" , wait a minute, I think to talk about a new society we shall be more crtics respect everythings. for exemple if you think how to put an end to jails in this system, you would be crazy, because this sytem needs criminal to survive, to show us the necessity of their security. So, the system don't just need criminals, it create criminals too.But if we talk about a new society without classes , in base the solidarity, sel-manegement, self-governament ... we shouldn't worry about it, I'm tire talk about anarchism. I think, I have been trying talk a lot about it. if you want more infomation about libertaria ideals. look
http://flag.blackened.net/revolt/anarchists/malatesta/crime.html
http://www.cat.org.au/aprop/
http://www.geocities.com/CapitolHill/1931/

ok, i see. a lot of you repli against anarchy is based in all the humans are bad in his natulalece(no tengo ni puta idea de cpmo se dice) i think that it´s a n stupid idea. people are no bad, and we are not good too it means tha in our natural stete we are anarchyst

eh we need people to rule... for example somebody still has to make the light bulbs

At 2/20/03 02:13 PM, old_school_fat_strat wrote: anarchy blows cock. it won't work EVER. there's to many fucked up people in the world... so why ever bother you fuckers?

it doesn't matter, you can't change scary people like goths, suicide bombers and republicans

Anyways Anarchism won't work, it will kill off the human race and will develop into dictatorship and then republican then dictator again.

It makes communism look infallible